Re: Beta test announcement - SyzAUTO/z Version 6
I'm kind of surprised that only 22 people/sites have joined the beta from the list here so far, I had expected a bit more. One thing that was pointed out when I asked was that I apparently made it seem like you had to continue to use the SyzAUTO/z product at the end, and I'm sorry that I gave that impression. While we would obviously love you to do that, it's not a requirement in any way. Also, some of you have asked about joining the other betas for the other parts of the automation suite, and I want to let you all know that when those go into beta, (they all do twice a year at least) that I will post it here so that you will know. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Beta test announcement - SyzAUTO/z Version 6
Hi, I wanted to let everyone on the list know that the Beta testing phase for SyzAUTO/z V6 is going to be starting on June 15. This time, the beta testing is not limited to just existing clients, we are asking for up to 150 non-client sites on a first-come basis. All beta test sites that test the product and fill out the questionnaire at the end will receive the product at a 50% discount ($2,500) off the standard $5K cost. Existing clients who participate in the beta can elect to receive the same discount on SyzAUTO/z or to acquire any other component of the Syzygy Automation suite (SyzCMD/z, SyzMPF/z, SyzSPOOL/z, SyzMON/z or Syz/NOTIFY/z at a 50% discount). The new features in this version include all of the following plus several more: 1) Restart windowing (up to 24 hours after system outage) 2) Comparative logic to issue scheduled commands or start JOBs/Tasks only if some other resource is active (or not active), or if running on a certain LPAR or any of several other query-able resources. 3) Site Control of all warning class messages 4) RAS updates, all DD's used by SyzAUTO/z are now optional. They can be provided dynamically via parmlib startup member entries 5) Optional Command Log (sysout or dataset) of all commands and actions 6) Can reply to WTOR's as part of the scheduled packages or command entries. 7) Simulation mode for all command packages, or the entire product 8) Interactive refresh of the product schedule to accept changes without the need for restart of SyzAUTO/z. 9) Command(s) to query all settings and functions, plus the NEXT scheduled command package or the just previous command package. 10) The SyzEMAIL component of SyzAUTO/z has been replaced with a more powerful and intelligent interface as well. SyzEMAIL/z allows the site to automatically send, via EMAIL, the condition codes and other facts about a tasks or JOBs execution including the condition codes at any time during or after the execution of the task/JOB). Version 6 is almost a complete rewrite of the old SyzAUTO/z product which is why we are interested in such a large and complete beta test phase. SyzAUTO/z is the optional automated Command and task scheduling component of the Syzygy Automation suite(*,**). Interested parties should contact the beta team at: clientsupp...@syzygyinc.com Thanks for your time, and please consider joining the beta test. Brian Westerman Syzygy Incorporated p.s. For those interested, the SyzCMD/z (automated command scripting) and SyzMPF/z (automated Console processing) products will be entering a new beta phase in July/August, SyzSPOOL/z (the spool management and automation product) will be entering it's beta phase in August/September. Also, as of the end of 2012, Syzygy will no longer provide phone or email support of the original AUTO product which was published on the CBT tape. That product was developed over 25 years ago and was replaced by the far more capable (and supported) SyzAUTO move than 8 years ago. *note: for information on other parts of the Syzygy Automation suite, please visit www.SyzygyInc.com **note: the Syzygy Automation Suite which includes: SyzAUTO/z(24x7x365 command and job/task scheduling), SyzCMD/z (interactive command scripting), SyzMPF/z (Console automation), SyzSPOOL/z (spool management and report maintenance with report availability via ISPF or the WEB), SyzMON/z (run time monitor for all tasks to allow automatic notification of outages and automatic recovery/restart of resources and tasks), and SyzNOTIFY/z (automatic notification of step and MAX condition codes via EMAIL for all JOBs and Started Tasks without requiring any JCL changes). -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Discussion groups devoted to Mainframe(zos) automation tools
There is also the Syzygy Automation Suite, it's a comprehensive, yet far less expensive solution than most. www.SyzygyInc.com Brian Westerman -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Subpool 231 usage
It's embarrassing to admit, but I actually did this to myself in one of our products (SyzMPF/z) which automates console messages. We also use a name table to hold the address if the getmained area for later processing by multiple address spaces. In my haste, I had created a situation whereby I created a new area (which was at a new location) and removed the old one, but didn't update the token, so it still pointed to the old area and resulted int he same error you have now. Luckily my error was caught in QA testing and the people there took great pride in holding it over my head. If the code doesn't first check to see if the token exists, and just goes out and makes a new area and fails to check that either the token failed to be change or failed to be created, you could end up with the same type of error. In our case it was an easy fix because we already had the code to test these out, I had just bypassed it. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Comments on DFSMS verbose messages?
Hi, I realize you said that you contacted the Automation Software companies, but you didn't contact us. We have hundreds of sites running our automation software, and while we were aware of how to process and not process the verbose messages, we were never contacted from you (or anyone) to ask our opinion and you didn't even inform us it was going to happen until it already was shipped and by then we already knew about it from our own testing. We had to figure it out for ourselves and be able to handle it before IBM would even acknowledge the change. For the most part, from what I can see of the actual messages that are generated, the verbose messages are a huge waste of resources. I'm happy that IBM sets the default to NOT generate those messages. There are a great number of messages that could have been changed to provide more or better information, but providing information that should have stayed in the documentation (manuals) was (in my opinion) a bad decision and a waste of resources. I realize that CPUs are a lot faster than they have ever been, but using the resources on frivolous things like keeping people from having to look up a message by always printing the verbose text is silly. Most people have the manuals available to them electronically, and the ones who don't probably wouldn't be the one who is going to have to look up the message in the first place. Sorry for the rant, I was just very surprised by the way you presented the question which made it look like you consulted or even informed the automation software vendors before you planned to make the change. It's not like there are that many of us and you could have at least acknowledged the change when we asked about it instead of ignoring the question and (even worse) bringing the subject up on a public forum. Makes me feel all warm and fuzzy about my relationship with IBM. Brian Westerman Syzygy Incorporated -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: A stupid idea? Using twitter like service for z/SO, et al., event notification.
Sorry if this sounds like a marketing entry, but it probably will. A little over two years ago I wrote a little product (called SyzTXT/z) that works with our other products but especially with the console message product (SyzMPF/z) so that if something happens that the site feels is important (abend, IP attack, or anything or any console event at all), SyzMPF/z will use SyzTXT/z to send email or SMS text to whoever (up to 255 users or groups of users) they want to get the messages. We also have another product (SyzNotify) that will send the highest condition (or abend) codes (similar to our SyzEmail product, except that SyzNOTIFY is automatic where SyzEmail requires JCL be added to the task) via email or sms text of any job (whether it works or not). At the time I wrote them it seemed to me that it had a small niche, but we found that people tend to buy some of our other products just because they want to use the smaller niche ones like SyzTXT and SyzNOTIFY. I would imagine that the reason is that people just want to be informed of what's happening and if you can keep them from having to log on, (i.e. they jsut look at there text message on their iPhone), then they feel better about how things are running. End of marketing :) Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Migrating to Z196
We have migrated several sites from z/9 and z/10 to z/196's and z/114's so far. Whether or not you will need to do a lot of work will depend more on what release of the OS you are at. You can contact me offline if you have questions, or here if you don't mind letting other people chime in as well. It probably would be helpful to have a thread for people to search through later as more an more people convert. Brian On Mon, 5 Mar 2012 21:27:45 -0800, Skip Robinson jo.skip.robin...@sce.com wrote: Just toddled down this path. Run SMP/E FIXCAT report for IBM.Device.Server.z196-* against every z/OS level that you will run on the new CEC(s). It worked for us. . . JO.Skip Robinson SCE Infrastructure Technology Services Electric Dragon Team Paddler SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager 626-302-7535 Office 323-715-0595 Mobile jo.skip.robin...@sce.com From: Jake anderson justmainfra...@gmail.com To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Date: 03/05/2012 08:38 PM Subject:Migrating to Z196 Sent by:IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Hello, We are planning to migrate from Z10 to Z196. So are there any manuals which speaks more on PSP bucket changes that is required during this migrations ? Jake -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: JCL OUTPUT DD access
Hi, BPXwdyn is used to dynamically allocate (SVC 99), I don't think the output statement details are available to it. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: JCL OUTPUT DD access
Dan sent some code that I passed on to Jeff which looks like almost exactly what he was looking for. It gets the OUTPUT statement information (and he even had the fields that Jeff was looking for in the code already) and I don't think he could have been happier. Thanks to all who responded. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
JCL OUTPUT DD access
Hi, I received a question today and I have looked around but can't find where the answer is for this guy. He is looking for information that is contained on the default OUTPUT Statement on a JOB that his program is meant to run as part of. He knows that there can be multiple OUTPUT Statements and the one he is concerned about is the default one, or one that he can control the name of i.e. //FRED OUTPUT parms...parms Does anyone know what control blocks are necessary to access the contents of the OUTPUTstatement if one exists in a JOB? He wants to access it from within the JOB itself, not externally from another addresspace. Anyone know where to look or what CB pointers are available? Thanks, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: JCL OUTPUT DD access
He wants to be able to access the OUTPUT statement fields from inside his program. I think he wants to be able to pass information, or act on the information contained there. He said he spent weeks trying on his own, and I looked around, but couldn't find any access path through the control blocks. I figured that it has to be connected to JES, so I assumed just looking at the JCT might be a good start, but couldn't find it quickly. Thanks for the information, I'm sure he will be happy for anything we can offer. BRian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: JCL OUTPUT DD access
Does anyone have an example of using SJFREQ RETRIEVE that I can send to Jeff? Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
I agree, We make sure that when we say we are staffed, that we mean on site at one of our 3 branches, not by some company that just answers the phone. The way we handle it in times when no one is around is that the support line phone system will automatically page someone after 5 minutes if no one physically takes the call, and after 10 minutes two people are paged, and at 15 minutes a third is added. After 30 minutes, the upper management people get added, so it's really rare to have more too much time go by. Unfortunately, we don't have the same feature on our web site. :( Brian On Mon, 2 Jan 2012 12:27:39 -0500, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote: John, Me either , I would have thought the vendor had the tools. Sounds like they want u to pay to have it done. Regards, Scott ford Sent from my iPad On Jan 1, 2012, at 9:01 PM, John McKown joa...@swbell.net wrote: On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 12:23 -0500, Scott Ford wrote: Brian, Yep the India support get back to you doesn't set well with me as a vendor. We get back to our customers ASAP. Also want to add, don't expect the Support to know anything. Been on the phone with a certain ISP and had to tell them how to shoot the problem. Regards, Scott Sent from my iPad Not just India, per se. It's the vendor, regardless of country. We in z/OS support, for some reason, are tasked with a distributed application, which replaced a z/OS application. It runs on a Tomcat server on Linux, and a Windows server. It uses Oracle as some sort of index for data files kept on a NAS box. They also support the application using MS SQL. We want to convert from Tomcat/Linux with Oracle to Tomcat/Windows with MS SQL (I don't know why). The vendor DOES NOT KNOW HOW TO DO THIS! They are asking us for things like the Oracle schema ( or maybe its the data: 3 Terabytes). WHAT??? It's __their__ schema. They don't know how to copy the data in the Oracle database into an MS SQL database. I'm not really in this discussion, so maybe I'm missing something. And don't intend to try getting into, because our DBAs are now outsourced. I really don't want to bother with that headache of talking to the US reps of a Dutch company to tell an outsourced DBA what needs to be done. Oh, my. I'm would be homicidal in about 5 minutes. I don't suffer fools gladly. -- John McKown Maranatha! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
You may have a point, but our view is that good software shouldn't have to cost an arm and a leg to be good. Mainly we are a consulting firm, and software started as a sideline, but once you get over a couple hundred clients, you have to devote more time and people resources to it, so now it's a whole separate division. We make sure that our software does what theirs does plus extra features. We have a good number of clients running it, but IBM and CA, even though they are far more expensive, and with less features in some cases, still has a far greater market share. I'm not sure hiking the price will help in this case. We try to cater to the sites that want value, and we would be only hurting them by upping to price to see if it would increase our market share. We have two new products coming out this year, maybe since neither one has any competition we should put a outrageously high price on them:). I seriously doubt that we will do that though, it just isn't the way we work. Brian On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 18:48:14 -0600, Chase, John jch...@ussco.com wrote: There still exists a mindset that believes, for example, that since functionality ABC normally costs between $xxxK and $yyyK, then your offer of functionality ABC at $xxxK/20 can't be very good, or you don't have the resources to provide the kind of support we need, etc. IOW, maybe your product's price is too cheap. -jc- -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Sorry Shmuel, I mind works on a different level than my fingers sometimes. I apologize for the mistake on your name. I'm still not too sure that there is a way to conduct an audit that would satisfy the vendor, that the site would agree to. I don't think disrupting a site is what the vendor would be trying to do, but if you limit the audit, then it's not an audit. i.e. I have a dollar in my pocket, but if you can't see the dollar then I am broke and you can look at me to prove that I am broke, but you cannot look into my pocket, because that might be disruptive. :} The audit would have to allow a search of all load libraries at a minimum, and would entail loading each and every module to check internally, not doesn't that sound like a lot of fun, it would be cost prohibitive for both the vendor and the site. The cost (in manpower) to enter a new license key is trivial compared to the cost of preparing for the audit. Then you would have to multiply it by the total software vendor base. I think most would go for the key after that. Brian On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:47:17 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In 8724193196442157.wa.brianwestermansyzygyinc@bama.ua.edu, on 12/29/2011 at 08:03 PM, Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com said: I'm sorry Schmuel, That's Shmuel! giving a vendor access to their site There's a difference between permitting an audit and allowing unrestricted access. I've certainly been at sites that allowed audits, but the auditors were limited to the relevant data. In this case I hardily agree with the view that the the vendor would be told to go pound salt. Perhaps by the bean counters, although I haven't seen that happen. What I have seen is shops where the presence of a licensing key is a deal breaker[1]. Imagine the security issues BTDTGTTS. The Devil is in the details, and it's not rocket science. There is a type of audit that I'd consider unacceptable: when trade organizations threaten to get a court order and conduct a deliberately disruptive search in order to extort payment of money that is not due. But that's not what is under discussion here. [1] In the sense that they would only license the product if there were contract terms that no vendor would ever agree to. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
So the question should be, who should bear the cost of that? The vendor, who has no control over the choices, or the site that wants to run the software? Unfortunately, this whole thread has sparked a heated debate internally here. There are those that are for scrapping the licensing code, and those that want it increased so that it's tighter with an easier way to extend things, (which seems counter productive to me). As with most arguments, the ones that develop the code have one mindset, and the ones that support the code have another, with the one that don't do either sitting on the fence cheering for blood:). Brian On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:55:37 -0500, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com wrote: At 20:42 -0600 on 12/29/2011, Brian Westerman wrote about Re: cpu / machine identification: We have DR support in our software, but I was under the impression that most of the DR sites were running the OS under VM and they simulated the serial anyway. I suppose their are sites that do not run the DR under VM, but don't the sites who don't run under VM know the serial number ahead of time, and wouldn't it be already built into the software, or they have a already setup job to enter the new serial(s)? I know I would have it set up if it were me. Knowing the Serial Number of the machine you are going to run DR on and having it already built into the software is being too optimistic. Not only can you have multiple DR Sites to go to and choosing one based on who can service you when you need DR Services but even if it was only one site, I am sure that they have multiple machines and you would not want to list all of them. Until you get there, you would not know which machine that is going to be assigned to you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
I 100% agree. Having been a systems programmer for most of my life, I'm used to the 24x7 mode of support. A lot of vendors are not. Or even worse, have a support number in India that will page someone, to get back to you. Brian On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 17:57:44 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In 9482792948874353.wa.brianwestermansyzygyinc@bama.ua.edu, on 12/29/2011 at 08:29 PM, Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com said: The one thing I do know is that vendors have the right to protect their software and as long as it's reasonable protection, I don't see why a site would complain about it. What do you mean by reasonable protection? From a customer perspective, it's not reasonable if it interferes with anything that's permitted by the license. That's why it's important for a vendor to consider failure modes and to have 24x366 coverage if he's going to use any sort of license-key mechanism. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Apparently we seem to be getting closer and closer to that. Brian On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 18:36:52 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In cajtoo5-kjv_9ilhjagbqxfjaazyefkjdt8xrcrvvpnpuug0...@mail.gmail.com, on 12/29/2011 at 11:11 PM, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com said: Would some of the macro worms be possible to infect some Linux products with macros on x86 and x64 and S390x? That's a concern for workstations, but who runs, e.g., Firefox, OpenOffice on z? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Actually, we had thought of putting in a module to request the key automatically, the code was fairly simple to request a new key from our server via TCP, and as long as the product had not expired the whole thing could be generated within a short transaction. When we floated it to some of our customers, they mostly responded back with why?. So it wasn't worth the time to finish the code, but I kept the original prototype just in case we changed our minds later. Brian On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 20:11:17 -0600, Mike Schwab mike.a.sch...@gmail.com wrote: Here is an idea: How about the message to the operator has reply value of ACK or ENTER. ACK would stand for acknowledge that you need a new key. ENTER would start a dialog to enter a new key. Reply with a 800 number to call and a customer number for the company. When the operator calls, you look them up and give them a license key for the new machine. On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 6:43 PM, Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com wrote: So the question should be, who should bear the cost of that? The vendor, who has no control over the choices, or the site that wants to run the software? Unfortunately, this whole thread has sparked a heated debate internally here. There are those that are for scrapping the licensing code, and those that want it increased so that it's tighter with an easier way to extend things, (which seems counter productive to me). As with most arguments, the ones that develop the code have one mindset, and the ones that support the code have another, with the one that don't do either sitting on the fence cheering for blood:). Brian On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 21:55:37 -0500, Robert A. Rosenberg hal9...@panix.com wrote: At 20:42 -0600 on 12/29/2011, Brian Westerman wrote about Re: cpu / machine identification: We have DR support in our software, but I was under the impression that most of the DR sites were running the OS under VM and they simulated the serial anyway. I suppose their are sites that do not run the DR under VM, but don't the sites who don't run under VM know the serial number ahead of time, and wouldn't it be already built into the software, or they have a already setup job to enter the new serial(s)? I know I would have it set up if it were me. Knowing the Serial Number of the machine you are going to run DR on and having it already built into the software is being too optimistic. Not only can you have multiple DR Sites to go to and choosing one based on who can service you when you need DR Services but even if it was only one site, I am sure that they have multiple machines and you would not want to list all of them. Until you get there, you would not know which machine that is going to be assigned to you. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all? -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: SV: cpu / machine identification
Seems sort of counter-intuitive. :) Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 10:35:21 +0100, Thomas Berg thomas.b...@swedbank.se wrote: -Ursprungligt meddelande- Från: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] För Brian Westerman Skickat: den 29 december 2011 03:10 Till: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Ämne: Re: cpu / machine identification ... I'm sure you lock your car, why do that if you have the only key? :) Brian I know of people that don't lock their cars - to avoid damage if someone wants to get into the car. Regards, Thomas Berg _ Thomas Berg Specialist A M SWEDBANK -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
I think I know that guy. He must work at just about every mainframe site in the world. :) Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 21:14:13 -0600, John McKown joa...@swbell.net wrote: On Thu, 2011-12-29 at 20:32 -0600, Brian Westerman wrote: I didn't realize that a employee can bind the site, but I can see where that might actually be the case. I can imagine what would happen to a site like IBM in Dallas, should Microsoft or Corel say, we're coming on Tuesday to check every one of your machines. That would be very interesting. Brian Reminds me vaguely of an internal auditor who wanted access to the z/OS system in order to verify that it was not compromised by Windows viruses. Was incensed that z/OS did not have any virus scanning software installed. Literally __could not__ understand why a Windows virus couldn't infect the mainframe. software is software and a system is a system. Didn't understand that the z wasn't Intel compatible. Complete IT idiot. -- John McKown Maranatha! -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Okay, Snipping the other stuff makes sense, but I'll keep my reply on top. I hate trying to skip through only to find that the person interspersed the comments. Brian On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 07:48:55 -0600, Tom Marchant m42tom-ibmm...@yahoo.com wrote: On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 20:29:02 -0600, Brian Westerman wrote: I found out that the quote is not on by default (the hard way :)) and also that I have to click on it BEFORE I enter any data. I'm glad that you've figured out how to quote the message that you are replying to. Now, I'd like to ask you to delete most of the message you are replying to, leaving enough to establish context for your remarks. I would also suggest that you post your comments AFTER the material that you quote. It make a difference if there is more than one point that you would like to reply to, as I do in this reply. It also makes a difference if someone would like to reply to more than one thing in your post. ..snip -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Sorry about that, I was sure that the original messages were appended, but I am obviously wrong. I think I probably just clicked on the send message without pressing the quote first. Sorry again, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
This is a test to see if the quote button on the bottom right is working. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification - testing quote
This is a test to see if I am getting the quote by pressing the quote button at the bottom right -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Another test, Okay, it appears that I have to click on the quote on the bottom right BEFORE I type anything here, so now I think I have it right. Is there a way to turn on Quoting as a default? Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 19:36:49 -0600, Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com wrote: Sorry about that, I was sure that the original messages were appended, but I am obviously wrong. I think I probably just clicked on the send message without pressing the quote first. Sorry again, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
I'm sorry Schmuel, normally I agree with your point on things, but I really have to disagree here. It's not like I have no experience with other sites, we have hundreds of clients, and I have been to well over 80% of them in person, and I can state without much worry that the percentages would not be on my side that the far greater percentage (approaching 100%) would never agree to giving a vendor access to their site to check up on them. Even when we go to a site as the IBM people, they go way out of their way to make sure that we stay focused on the problem and don't just look around. As a non IBM vendor, it would be even less likely that the client would just open their site to us. In this case I hardily agree with the view that the the vendor would be told to go pound salt. Imagine the security issues that would have to be dealt with to just give them an ID that has the capability to check. Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 05:02:06 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote: In 7026723933836234.wa.brianwestermansyzygyinc@bama.ua.edu, on 12/28/2011 at 07:58 PM, Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com said: I really don't think any site would readily agree to have their site audited by a software company for compliance. Why not? After the silence, the sale would disappear. :) Perhaps at your site. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
Sorry, I found out that the quote is not on by default (the hard way :)) and also that I have to click on it BEFORE I enter any data. I was answering a response that stated that if a site has a site license, that there should be no constraints on the code, but I wanted to point out that not all sites license the code for the entire site (some is for a single CPU or LPAR), and that there is no protection against the software becoming part of some systems programmer's goodie bag when he/she moves to the next site. You can limit by date, that also doesn't provide proper protections. I had wanted to point out that people lock their cars, even when they have the only key. There are people that even lock their car in their own garage. It's more work to unlock the car, but they do it anyway. If you take your car to the shop to be worked on and park it in their lot, do you lock it? Do they lock it when they are done? When you take your key out of the ignition, the steering wheel locks in place. You can't turn the wheel without inserting your key, some people see that as a safety feature, others as a anti-theft feature, some people break the inter-lock that controls that feature. The safety and anti-theft parts have long since been rendered useless because of the technology in the cars computer circuitry, but if a car was shipped without the feature most people would see that as a defect and take it back to be fixed. Actually reading back on the previous paragraph, it gets more away from the point than I wanted to be, but I'll leave it anyway because (while really tangential), it makes a point that I wanted to get to which is that the extra work required for something, in this case the maintenance of the keys for software at the site, is a bummer, but is also necessary because there are some sites (and some people) who will just not follow directions or abide by the rules and you cannot reasonably expect the vendor to take all the risk. Small vendors might know all of their clients personally and know if they can trust them with their code, frankly, if they do then they probably don't have very many clients. A company like IBM or CA, who makes billions a year, can afford to be lax on control of their software (although CA isn't really that lax), and they up the price to everyone to make up for the possibility that someone isn't paying. The software has long since paid for itself and in many cases, there is other software that is better and cheaper, but people still see them as the first choice. I'm not sure why, maybe it's like with a car, you wouldn't buy a car from Chevrolet and get the doors from Ford, even if Ford has a better door that fits perfectly. It probably has nothing to do with that, but I honestly don't know why it is. Our automation software is years ahead of IBM and CA's, and theirs cost 90 to 95% more, but they still have the biggest market shares in automation software. I don't know why, marketing might have something to do with it, but it's not like you see big marketing pushes for their automation software anywhere so I just don't know why it is. The one thing I do know is that vendors have the right to protect their software and as long as it's reasonable protection, I don't see why a site would complain about it. Most sites do not complain, but obviously some do, that's what started the thread after the person who entered the original request asked for comments. Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 15:02:14 +, Pommier, Rex R. rex.pomm...@cnasurety.com wrote: Brian, I see your point, but have a request for you. Don't get quite so aggressive with the electronic scissors on snipping away the context. The beginning of your comment below says it all - That works What's that? Since there have been several comments/points of view made, it would be much easier to leave the comment you are replying to in your reply. Not trying to be flippant, mind you. :-) Rex -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Brian Westerman Sent: Wednesday, December 28, 2011 8:02 PM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: cpu / machine identification That works for a site license and I agree with it for that type of license, but what about sites that purchase a single processor license and have 4 processors, or a systems programmer that decides that he can fix his friends problem by sending a copy of the code to them, or the one that decides to post the code on facebook. (I reaching with the facebook thing, but hopefully you see my point). Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN The information contained in this e-mail may contain confidential and/or privileged information and is intended for the sole use
Re: cpu / machine identification
I didn't realize that a employee can bind the site, but I can see where that might actually be the case. I can imagine what would happen to a site like IBM in Dallas, should Microsoft or Corel say, we're coming on Tuesday to check every one of your machines. That would be very interesting. Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 14:47:21 -0500, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net wrote: On 28 December 2011 20:58, Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com wrote: I don't mean to be flippant, but I seriously almost spit my diet coke all over my screen when I read the previous reply about allowing the software company to audit their system. :) I really don't think any site would readily agree to have their site audited by a software company for compliance. It sounds good to say that, but in reality I really really doubt that anyone at just about any site would agree to it. I can just imagine the dead silence that would happen when a marketing person says oh yeh, and we will be here in sometime during the year and audit all of your CPU's and LPARs to make sure we can really trust you. After the silence, the sale would disappear. :) Please don't take offense with my response. It just took me by surprise. I've seen Fortune 500 companies happily sign mainframe software contracts with vendor written auditing provisions; others who[se lawyers] routinely snipped out the auditing paragraph without comment, and others who negotiated the details. BTW, a number of popular desktop software products from well known vendors have audit clauses in the click-through licence agreement. Usually corporate Contracts doesn't see those, and it's less than clear if the individual employee can bind the company by clicking Accept. I've also seen what happened when a vendor tried to do an audit - consisting of asking for a subset of SMF records - on a random set of customers, some with audit clauses and some without, and for the most part it wasn't pleasant in either case. Tony H. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
We have DR support in our software, but I was under the impression that most of the DR sites were running the OS under VM and they simulated the serial anyway. I suppose their are sites that do not run the DR under VM, but don't the sites who don't run under VM know the serial number ahead of time, and wouldn't it be already built into the software, or they have a already setup job to enter the new serial(s)? I know I would have it set up if it were me. This also has nothing to do with the question, but I have always thought that the vendor should be compensated for support of the DR testing anyway. (this will probably cause a lot of angry responses). It's a separate processor and the vendor has to support a problem that might occur on it just like they would if it were the primary processor, which may not have the issue. If that were the case, then the vendor has to support your DR test for free. Now if you are paying $50k for the software, it's probably a reasonable expectation, but if you are paying $2K to $5K it's not as reasonable. I received an email between my last response and this one that said (a lot of things, but basically) that many sites (the grater percentage) don't know what they pay for their software because a) it's done by another department or their boss, or b) they only think about it when they first license the product and don't think about the cost involved until they either run low on budget and are trying to save some amount or they have a problem that makes them unhappy with the product that they are currently paying for. Is that true across the board with you people? Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2011 17:39:58 -0500, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote: ZMan I am pretty well versed in pc/unix/mf and learning Appleseed... Btw I wasn't a fan of CPU/serials because DR was such a pita without new product patches,etc for new CPUs.. Sent from my iPad On Dec 29, 2011, at 2:40 PM, zMan zedgarhoo...@gmail.com wrote: On Thu, Dec 29, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Scott Ford scott_j_f...@yahoo.com wrote: As A vendor I understand the CPU/serial situation but one has to consider the less than honest customers and 'yes' I have experience that also Sent from my iPad ...points to the liabilities of communicating using mobile devices? :-) -- zMan -- I've got a mainframe and I'm not afraid to use it -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
I don't mean to be flippant, but I seriously almost spit my diet coke all over my screen when I read the previous reply about allowing the software company to audit their system. :) I really don't think any site would readily agree to have their site audited by a software company for compliance. It sounds good to say that, but in reality I really really doubt that anyone at just about any site would agree to it. I can just imagine the dead silence that would happen when a marketing person says oh yeh, and we will be here in sometime during the year and audit all of your CPU's and LPARs to make sure we can really trust you. After the silence, the sale would disappear. :) Please don't take offense with my response. It just took me by surprise. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
We have our products tell how long they are licensed for (how much time is left) on each startup. When it gets within 45 days we make it highlighted (but still rolls off the screen), then at 15 days it stays on the screen. Then when it expires, we still have a grace period, that varies with the product and the site. It's a little more work, but only has to be done once (when it starts up) and then sets bits that can be checked periodically for the always up products so that they don't have to do anything but compare once a day or so. The overhead is extremely minimal, and we have not had complaints about the intrusiveness of the messages. We don't like having that code at all, but unfortunately have been bitten in the past with sites that forgot to pay and ignore our requests for payment. there are two of them are still running the code from over 8 years ago (for free) and one of them actually asked us for a update to the newer version, but didn't want to move to it because it had the built-in expiration. I guess that you could consider it a lost sale, but the alternative is that they just continue to run the old code (which is far less capable) for free. So, while most sites are honest and would never consider running unpaid code, there are some (although very few) that don't care. The sad part is that we price our code low enough that any site can run it and save a lot of money over the cost of IBM's or CA's (etc.) code, and we even offer a further discount for the IBM-Main and Share members, but we still get calls from sites that are upgrading their OS and find that they are running our code and did not know it. Sometimes it's carried there by migrating sysprogs, and sometimes the code was zapped to get around the checking. Normally, they become customers, but sometimes (when we send them information on the cost) they simply disappear. There are sites paying tens of thousands to run IBM's or CA's automation products and don't blink at the cost, our customer base is more concerned about the overall cost and feature sets (we have more features at a MUCH lower cost, on the order of 2% to 5% of the cost for theirs). Those sites tend to tell us they are expiring soon (well before the 45 day reminder starts), and it works out well for all involved. We have moved to 100% electronic delivery of invoices, and we were able to reduce our product costs even more because of the savings in people costs. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
That's a good point, our code does put out the message at startup about the site it's licensed to. But if someone was going to run it purposely and not pay, zapping the one instance of the name is not as hard as changing every page of a 300 page book. The licensing scheme isn't to make life hard for the normal user, it's to protect the product from the bad guys. I'm sure you lock your car, why do that if you have the only key? :) Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: cpu / machine identification
That works for a site license and I agree with it for that type of license, but what about sites that purchase a single processor license and have 4 processors, or a systems programmer that decides that he can fix his friends problem by sending a copy of the code to them, or the one that decides to post the code on facebook. (I reaching with the facebook thing, but hopefully you see my point). Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Terminology
In my college math classes we called it a negation. Which doesn't make it correct, and I no longer have the Calculus books from way back then. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IGD049I ACTIVATE FAILED - ACS
Most times the problem is that you have specified one SCDS for your changes and are trying to activate another one. Sometimes people forget to put the DSN in quotes on one page, and sometimes they try to activate from a completely different dataset than they think they are using. This is probably one of those errors, just check the dataset names and you will probably see where you went wrong. Sometimes it's very easy to overlook something simple like a single character different or transposed. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: DUMP on CATLST Job
Yes, the dump codes you are getting would be helpful. Possibly you are getting normal IDCX messages and are confusing them with dump codes. If you cut/paste the syslog portion that you are referring to or the joblog it would make you question much easier to answer. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: iPad and HMC and Safari?
If you purchase the iPad Cloud Browser app you can use both Flash and Java on the iPad. It actually runs a full Firefox session and streams the content to your iPad. The finger movements are a little different from the standard ones, but easy to get used to. There are a couple others that might be better (or worse) called iSwifter and Puffin, but I have only ever used Cloud Browser. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: How to make console alert with sound
Our SyzMPF/z product ( http://syzygyinc.net/SyzMPFz.aspx ) also performs these types of changes. Among many many other features, you can highlight/lowlight, change color, change video mode (i.e. make in reverse video and/or blink), and you can also issue other highlighted or operator alter messages at the same time. All IBM-MAIN members receive a 50% discount on the already extremely low price. The Syzygy Automation Facility gives you the capabilities of IBM's and CA's automation products at a very small fraction of the cost. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS SYSLOG observation / thought
The ASID is available at the point just before the message is sent to the console. Our SyzMPF/z product gets the messages before they go to hardcopy (you can have SyzMPF/z keep them from getting there if you want), and one of the fields that I have access to (and we allow you to use in the scripts that are automatically processed for the messages) is the ASID of the issuer. It would not be that difficult to just update the outgoing message and pop in the ASID, especially if it was destined for a specific spot in the message. The only messages that wouldn't get the ASID would be those that are issued on behalf of something else, so they would get the ASID of the actual issuer of the message. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automated SMFDUMP Job issue
I sent them the correction for their problem, there were actually several issues, and I decided to give them the easiest one to fix the problem. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: SRB code
I second that vote. :) Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automated SMFDUMP Job issue
First, The CONSOLxx member segment that you printed most likely has nothing to do with the console that is trying to be used to issue the message. We are not talking REAL consoles here, (Unless your REPLYTO utility is specifically using the MASTER console, in which case you would not be getting the error in the first place). Here's what I need to help you, inside your REPLYTO program, at the point where it issues the reply, I need to know what the code is. It would probably be helpful to show the code for the 10 or 15 lines BEFORE the reply is issued. To get the reply number, they have to go cross system to the console address space, then once they have the reply number, then they set up the actual reply message. When they issue that message, they are NOT using a REAL console, they are using an E or S type console, which has to be defined correctly on your LPAR. The description of how you are running the code is really very Rube Goldberg, and while I understand what it's doing, I really can't help but wonder what you were thinking when you set it up to run like that. Later in your reply, you seem to understand that the E or S type MCS console is an issue, and you are correct. Even when you fix that entry, (which probably is just missing from the CONSOLxx member or there is an error in the CONSOLxx member that causes it to not get defined), you should still take a step back and look at what you have cobbled together, there are much better ways to do what you are trying to do. I can't believe that you actually have s bunch of these started tasks sitting their with 5 minute timers just waiting for the message to finally show up. I really do wonder what you were thinking when you set that up. :) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automated SMFDUMP Job issue
Hi, The old AUTO program that you are using has long since been replaced by SyzAUTO/z (I rewrote AUTO over 15 years ago to correct all of the issues and add more functionality) available at http://syzygyinc.net/AUTOz.aspx , but AUTO isn't the cause of your problem. What has happened is that you have a console set up on your LPAR (the one you experience the problem on) (or you generate one within your REPLYTO utility) and that console doesn't have the proper authority to answer (reply) to the outstanding WTOR. There are several ways that you can go about fixing this, you can either change the autotask (the task that responds, or at least is trying to respond to the WTOR), and make sure it has master console authority. You can check this via D C,CN=autotaskname (sans quotes and replacing autotaskname with your task name). It's also possible that your REPLYTO program is using just SVC34 to answer the reply or MGCR (or MGCRE), in any case you have to set up register zero correctly (or you can get this problem), or int he case of MGCRE you may be specifying a console name to use that is defined incorrectly (In CONSOLxx) on this particular LPAR. When a WTOR is issued and sent to the consoles it should go to, the system only allows one of those consoles to REPLY to it. The IEE703I is issued when the ROUTECODEs of the WTOR do not match the ROUTECODEs of the console, AND, the console does NOT have MASTER authority. The authority is passed into console processing at the time the application issues the MCSOPER macro. In addition, it can be pre-set in the RACF OPERPARM segment for the used user ID. If no authority is specified then AUTH=INFO is the default and the console will not be allowed to reply to WTORs. With AUTH=MASTER the console should be allowed to reply to WTORs. You can check the console attributes with D C,CN=consolename command. You are eligible for a discount (it's an IBM-MAIN member discount) to get the supported version of AUTO for $2,500 and you can also obtain SyzMPF/z which will allow you to set up scripts to reply to WTOR's or any message to remove the problems you are having with your home-grown REPLYTO utility. You can however continue to use the freeware versions if you want, there are some problems with them, but if you don't mind then it's probably okay. Personally, considering the low cost of getting a supported version of code that you use, I would make the purchase, but I'm biased. ;) Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automated SMFDUMP Job issue- Still waiting for suggestion
The solution here is the same as the solution I provided you to the original question. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: WTO Sample Program
Why not do both, you can set up the Console Interface code (for modify), set a wait on an ECB and generate the stickynote message yourself (which you can DOM whenever you feel like it). That way you don't have to use WTOR at all, but you have all of the good parts (minus the replyID, which you don't need anyway). You can go back and check for the modify at any interval you want. The code segment to wait/check can be really short and I would guess that checking every 5 seconds or so for a day would use less than 1 second of CPU time. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Scheduling Tasks via JES2 automatic commands
You can also use the replacement for the freeware CBT tape AUTO called SyzAUTO/z, which has many extra features and also has fixes for some of the freeware product issues (midnight issue, fast processor support (the old one was written for much slower processors in the 1980's),etc.) I maintained/wrote them both, so I should know. ;) It's not free, but very cheap, plus IBM-Main members get an additional discount so the final price is $2,500. The software is the same price no matter how big (or small) your physical CPU is. http://syzygyinc.net/AUTOz.aspx Brian Westerman -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Scheduling Tasks via JES2 automatic commands
I forgot to mention that SyzAuto/z provides complete 24x7 command and job and task scheduling and we have over 300 site users. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: JES 40 and 52 exits
Hi Mike, Exit 52 (and the corresponding exit 2) are for modifications to the JOB statement, not the JCL, so that's not the place to add your two cards (unless they are to be added to the JOB card). The proper place to change JCL and add cards within the JCL stream itself (under JES) is in exits 4 and 54 (the exits can be combined to one set of code for both exits, but that wasn't your question, and it's not a requirement, just a nice thing to do. Exit 4 is for scanning JCL and JES2 control statements for jobs submitted through card readers, RJE, SNA and BSC NJE, and SPOOL reload. For jobs submitted through internal readers or TCP/IP NJE, exit 54 is called to process JCL and JES2 control statements (JECL). Each time the exit (4 or 54) is called, it's for a complete card of the JCL (or JECL). The thing to keep in mind is that if you have (for example) a DD card that is two lines long: //OUTPUT DD DSN=MIKES.DAT.SET,UNIT=SYSDA, // VOL=SER=12345,SPACE=(CYL,(1,1)),DISP=(NEW,CATLG) the exit will be called twice to process that DD (because it's two lines long) ,but the buffer will be the same on both calls, luckily you are told that you are doing that and which one you're on at the time, so it makes it simple to add your data, jsut make sure you remember the hint. The JES2 INIT exits manual is really complete on how to add cards in Exit 4 and 54, you will want to use the RJCB (RGETRJCB service, although you can also use the XPL instead, it's up to you) to add the cards. It's VERY clear on how to do it Module HASX04A in SYS1.SHASSAMP contains a sample of Exit 4. Modules HASX54A, HASX54B, and HASX54C in SYS1.SHASSAMP contains a samples of Exit 54. The exit 4 code above is pretty scarce, but the exit 54 samples are a lot more detailed. I have an exit 4/54 sample that changes job priority, and adds a continuation and EXPDT=99000 card to tape jobs that forget to specify it, but you can probably get much better samples from the JES2-L group. Exit40 is the proper place to change SYSOUT, but if it's part of the JCL itself, then you can also put the change into exit 4/54. I believe you can also get samples for these exits at the SHARE site. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: IPL abend z/os 1.8
Hi, BEFORE you IPL z/OS 1.8 on the z/10, you have to install the pre-requisite maintenance to z/OS 1.8 that is outlined in the Upgrade 2097DEVICE bucket, (which you can get from the IBM technical help database). There is a section of that bucket that specifically deals with z/OS 1.8. You can't bring it up and then put the maintenance on, you have to put the maintenance on first. All the dump will tell you is that you failed to initialize PCAUTH or when z/OS first goes out and sees the zIIP or zAAP processors and has no idea what to do with them. They other responders were correct on the need to have the old style SYS1.DUMPnn datasets in the master catalog in this instance. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: DS6800 and OS/390 2.9
You can use the DS/6xxx under OS/390 (back to 2.7), but you cannot use some of the DS/6xxx features. You also MUST use system Z hardware (i.e. z-series), you cannot use a 9672 (or anything older than a z/800). We ran fine with a customer converting on a z/800 with OS/390 2.7 who converted from a 2105 to a DS/6 with no problems, we updated the hardware first (got rid of the 2105) and then updated them to the current version of z/OS (which was then z/OS 1.10). They were on a 9672, but we moved the OS to the z/800 first. We didn't test if it would work on the 9672, the DS box wasn't going to be installed until 2 months after the z/800, so even though we were told that it wouldn't work, we never really got a chance to test it. I do believe that it probably would not have worked on the 9672 though. The entire conversion took about 3 months because of some application programming issues, the hardware part was a weekend thing to install the new Raid, copy everything to it and we were done. We did run into some problems with how slow the copy ran, and we never did find out why, but once we were on the new DS box there seemed to be no problem, and we had other things to do so we never went back to look into it. It wasn't as slow as going to tape first or anything, but it was not anywhere near as fast as we had calculated that it should be. If you want you can contact me offline and I will help you all that I can. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Speculation: Random thoughts on web based report access
Hi John, A very similar function to this is part of our newer releases of SyzSPOOL/z. We have made part of the SyzSpool log (where everything is indexed) file available to the web interface, depending on your settings on the web side of things, and what the mainframe side has set, you can see (with limits) information on the tasks that executed. The new push interface we have will update at the interval the user selects with the newest task information that they are interested in. Our design specs were to make it act like RSS, and we found that we could do it, but not in one step because we had to change the log file first to get the required information into it so that we could take advantage of it without exposing everything to the interface. We decided that it would be best to use two small releases to get the pieces all in place, then a whole new version will add the RSS/push part. So far we have the two releases done and out in the field, and we updated the current release to support the new web pages that we use to push things, we are in the design testing of the new version that uses those new pages and can push the actual data. Our biggest hurdle was that we thought we had to keep things so secure that there was no possibility that anyone would see that a job had even ended, when that wasn't really an issue. Knowing that the payroll job ended is not the big secret, well... it is, but not to the extent that we thought originally. Actually seeing anything about that job is the secret. So what we ended up doing was splitting the log file into internal pieces which are able to be controlled by not only RACF (or ACF/2, etc.) resource rules, but make it so that some parts are just not accessible from some interfaces. That allowed us to have multiple classes of access (there are 255), and still control everything from the mainframe side. It's not that we don't trust the web users... well, I guess it's true, we don't trust them, but the way we have implemented things the site can decide how much (to a point) they want to disclose under different authentication modes. But we didn't change the rules for the spool data itself. If you want to browse the actual output, you still have to have RACF access to the output in the first place. In the older releases, you had to have the RACF authority to look at the output to even see that it was there, now, you might or might not need that authority, (depends on the class assigned by the site), and we can push that informationout to the authenticated user. The idea is that eventually, it would be nice to provide a standard RSS feed type access, but security comes first. Even if the site wants to be non-secure, we don't allow it for the actual output, only a subset of the task execution information. How large that subset is will depend on what the site wants to do with the classifications on the mainframe side. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Suppress command output from SYSLOG
There are two very easy ways to do this, you can write a MPF exit and use it for the messages that you want suppressed from the console, (the bit setting you want to set are as follows): To keep it from the JOBLOG of the task that issued the command: OICTXTERF3,CTXTESJL Suppress from joblog to keep the message from the entire SYSLOG: OICTXTRFB2,CTXTRDTM Suppress from hardcopy syslog The other way, (which is much simpler) is to use a product that can do this for you. Strangely enough, we happen to market a very inexpensive one that does the above and many, many other features. You can go to the company web site at www.SyzygyInc.com for more information. Brian Westerman Syzygy Incorporated -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: testing z/OS 1.8 on a Z/196 or z/114
That brings up two questions. Why did you use or need the newer version of the SVC and the second question is how do you go about getting it? Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: testing z/OS 1.8 on a Z/196 or z/114
Sorry, Ignore my question, you already answered it. Thanks, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Unit Check While IPL'ng from DS6800
Hi, On a 6800 the unit checks are at the LSS level, not the device, so the good news is that your physical devices are more than likely okay. Have you tried a graceful shutdown and restart of the 6800 while the z/9 was down or at least not connected? The only time we have had any IPL issues with our ds8000 was after a power outage, and it was corrected by doing a Power off of the z/10, and the ds8000, then powering on the ds8000, then the z/10. Everything came back fine after that. We had the CE run diagnostics later and nothing bad came up, and we have not had any issues since at that site (at least not with the hardware). Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: testing z/OS 1.8 on a Z/196 or z/114
Hi, The Adabas is at 7.4.3 (with PTF's). They are not allowed to go to version 8 because of the fixed price purchase they did a few years ago, (at least not without an up front charge of a huge amount of $$$) Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: testing z/OS 1.8 on a Z/196 or z/114
Actually, that could be a tremendous help. They are running Adabas 7.4.3+PTFs (which makes them technically 7.4.4, according to SAG), and z/OS 1.10 is fully supported on the z/196 and z/114 without the lifecycle extension. Obtaining a copy of z/OS 1.10 is problematic, but doable. Are you guys running Com-Plete as well, and if so, what release? Thanks again, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
testing z/OS 1.8 on a Z/196 or z/114
Hi, We have a client (a small University) who we provide (steeply) discounted software support services for, who would like to move their OS from a z/10 LPAR (a very small LPAR on a much larger facility), to their own small z/114. They are not able to convert to z/OS 1.10 or above right now because of a software issue with one of their products (Adabas). I have explained that they will need the lifecycle extension to execute properly on the new box, and they are willing more than to do that, but they would like to verify that it will work for them before they commit themselves to moving from their current LPAR (which is on someone else's (a much larger University's) z/10 box) to their own. I understand their concern, starting up a data center is not something to go blindly into, but I have no idea where they can test their OS ahead of time. I have contacted IBM to see about testing in Dallas, but that appears to not be a z/196 and is running under z/VM and won't fit the bill. Is there anyone on the list who has a z/196 or z/114 that is willing to provide a small test LPAR to IPL and bring up Adabas to verify that it works for them? I realize that this is an imposition, but they just want to be sure that it will IPL and that the address spaces will start. There will be no users involved in the testing, it's just a straight functionality test. They are a university and they have a test Adabas with no secure data on it. I can make the 3390 volumes available in whatever format you need them in (tape or transmittable), and I can make any necessary HCD changes before I make the copy of the system. So, is there anyone willing to help out a California University with this? Please feel free to contact me on or off list. Brian Westerman brian_wester...@syzygyinc.com (800) 767-2244 -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Has anyone replaced ca-sort with ibm sort recently? any issues?
Hi Kurt, We have recently migrated two sites from CA-Sort to DF/Sort. The only real issues you can run up against are when the site decides to use the sort exits because they are not compatible. Other than that, they are fairly interchangeable. We probably do 10 or more of these migrations a year, between DF/Sort, Syncsort and CA-Sort, they normally go quite simply, and even when exits are involved it's a snap for us to replace. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automatic email of condition codes and stats
It's not particularly a good idea to dynamically allocate the spool output dataset (which contains the email itself) from where the code is running at the time. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automatic email of condition codes and stats
You can do that with our other product (SyzSPOOL), but it's not really the same thing, we wanted to (and did) put together an easy to read synopsis of what the task did. Also, there are some tasks that don't have JOBLOGs, but still require notification when/if they come down. The product is actually a bit more than just the mailing of the condition codes, etc. It also sends text messages (and pages) when things happen that are deemed important by the site. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: restricting how I do things so that others understand?
John, I think I would go with the UNIX route that you wanted in the first place. The people at your site are going to have to deal with UNIX at some point. z/OS keeps moving more and more to offloading a lot of functionality to the USS component, so the sooner they learn to deal with it the better off they will be in the long run. My 2cents worth anyway... Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automatic email of condition codes and stats
Hi, That's a good idea, but SysREXX can't get to the job's control blocks by the time the ended message comes out, many of them are already gone and/or (even worse) in the process of being freed. I originally implemented it as a SysREXX, but was limited to just the MAXCC, none of the individual step stuff or the detail timing data was there any more, just the final JOB stuff. Thanks, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Automatic email of condition codes and stats
Hi all, I have a small dilemma. I have designed and written a semi-new facility that automatically sends the task condition codes (including the max CC) and stats via email. I currently have it implemented and in Alpha testing in two modes. We have provided this via a manual method (via SyzEMAIL) for a few years now, and clients have asked for a way to do this automatically, so I figured out a few ways to do it and boiled it down to two prototypes which I designed and wrote. Option 1: I wait for the ENDED console message to appear and run the control blocks getting all of the tasks information, Name, Number, execution stats, etc. (and the condition codes), build the data in memory (because it's not really a good idea to dynamically allocate the email from this particular spot:) ) and then at a user specified interval (default is 15 seconds), a always running task looks at the data and merges it with data from the security system and/or user defined table(s) (to decide who gets the email) and sends one (or more) off to whatever address(es) were found and cleans up the memory related data. Option 2: Is really just an addition to our already existing SyzEMAIL (which already sends the email of the CC's etc.) program that adds JES exit and allows you to specify a //*EMAIL=emailaddress card which, if found, will generate a final step that executes the newer version of SyzEMAIL which does the same processing above, but has no need for the always running task, nor for storing any data in memory. The final step just gathers and builds it all and sends it. The JES exit isn't really mandatory, it just allows you the option of adding the //*EMAIL card, and it places the last step there for you unless one is found there already executing SyzEMAIL. Both ways run fine, and have advantages and disadvantages. There are some extra bells and whistles like keeping the email address in RACF and keying off the job owner ID, or deciding by task name, programmer information or accounting data who gets the email but they all exist in both implementations. The main advantage to the JES exit version is that it has less pieces, the disadvantage is that I have found that sites don't like putting in exits if they can get around it. The advantage internally (here) to the JES exit option is that the SyzEMAIL program gets a small upgrade (adds more information and optional HTML output), but no other code (beyond the exit) is needed, thus less maintenance on our end. The advantage to option #1 is that I like it and think it's really kind of cool but that appears (internally) to be one of the disadvantages. A disadvantage to Option 2 is that the exit is tied to JES releases so we would end up maintaining (potentially) a lot of version! s (one for each JES release). My dilemma is that I have been told that we will not be using both methods and we have to choose one or the other. I asked everyone here and got almost an even three-way split (option 1, option 2, and whats an exit?), so I thought I would go out to the list and see how the real world feels about the options. What do you think? If you would rather tell me off-list, that's okay as well. I see good points to each method and having designed the code, I have found that it's sometimes difficult (or impossible) to see that bad points. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automatic email of condition codes and stats
Unfortunately the SyzEMAIL part of things is different depending on which implementation is used which means that we would end up with maintaining two completely different SyzEMAIL programs which are drastically different, but so close in function that it's possible that things could get confused. Originally I had thought that I would call one SyzNTFY instead, but that was not very well received. From a marketing standpoint it makes sense to give the site the choice (that's how I designed it originally), but from a maintenance standpoint, I can see where it might be confusing to try to keep things right. So I understand why they want only one path, (not that I agree with it completely), so unless I can think of a better option, I just have to choose one of the first two. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Java 1.4 and zOS 1.12
On 4 separate conversions to 1.12 the client had issues with some of their Java applications that ran fine under 1.4 at the old release of z/OS. We reran with Java 1.6 and the problems no longer existed. The problems had something to do with the way classes are obtained or maintained when a lot of passing object back and forth went on, but I can't remember exactly. I do remember that it didn't appear to matter whether they used the 64bit version of 1.6 or not, both of them executed the code fine. Most of their Java code ran fine, but there was no reason, once we found some that didn't work, to put any effort into not changing to 1.6. I'm not that good of a Java programmer, but I think that there was no functionality lost in 1.6 which was there in 1.4, and I don't think they had to alter their code at all. The stuff I write doesn't really seem to mind what version it runs on, but it's admittedly not that complex. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: JCL Question
I have a UJV exit that we market which allows you to create variables for BATCH jobs as well as STC's. At our customer sites we use it to control the DSN's of the backups and hundreds of other jobs. The users also take advantage of the capabilities, (the ones that know how to read the manual :)). You can license ours, or you can download a very similar one from www.cbttape.org/ file 573 that has a few less capabilities (but should be able to do the below), but is free. i.e. // SET BKPDSN='DZYEAR.ZMONTH.ZDAY..TZTIME.' //BACKUP00 EXEC PGM=ADRDSSU,REGION=0M //SYSPRINT DD SYSOUT=* //DISK0DD UNIT=3390,DISP=SHR,VOL=SER=FC6C00 //TAPE0DD UNIT=3480,DISP=(,CATLG),LABEL=(1,SL), //DSN=SYSTAPE.Z13DL1.BKPDSN,VOL=(,RETAIN,,10) ends up with a DSN (assuming the job runs today at 22:59) of: SYSTAPE.Z13DL1.D110712.T2259 There are literally hundreds (well, maybe a lot is a better term) of JCL variables that you can create using the exit and you are not limited to running as a Started Task for any of them. Some people don't like using exits, I personally feel that a good exit is worth it's weight in gold. Eventually IBM will come around and support doing this natively, and (currently) there are a lot of reasons why they can't, but there is no reason you shouldn't do it on your own until then. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: DS8100 HDD failures
I honestly would be very surprised if IBM reused the platters. The components might be able to be reused, but the disks (for the old Sharks, and DS6000's) are destroyed. I would imagine that the DS8100 is handled the same way. Also, as good as I think I am, I think I would be hard pressed to get anything usable out of one if it were to be refurbished and sent back to us. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: performance differences between java versions
It does take quite a bit longer to load the newer versions, and the 64 bit take longer to initially load than the 31bit ones, but the actually execution of your user Java code under the newer versions is quite a bit faster, especially between 1.4 and 1.6. There is a doc on the IBM site (I can't remember the name), but it was created for 1.6 and it compared execution environments to show what was faster under the new release. Everything was, but they didn't cover the load of the initial environment (probably because they already knew it was going to be slower). Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Console COMMAND
Sorry, I think I messed up my last entry. Any way, you should be able to convert your code to SYSREXX (System REXX). Also, I hate to bring it up because of the controversy about marketing, but we have automation products (SyzCMD/z and SyzMPF/z) which provide the type of automation you are looking for. They are extremely inexpensive and there is a good discount for IBM-MAIN and SHARE members, and better yet, are completely supported, we just successfully tested all of our code under z/OS 1.13. You can execute your exec as part of our product (it allows you to execute REXX), but chances are that the internal commands will probably do the job as well or better. Again, I hate to bring up the marketing stuff, but in this case it applies quite well if you are not interested in the System REXX approach. Brian Westerman Syzygy Incorporated www.syzygyinc.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Z/OS Maintanance
I also have been working with MVS since before (just) 1980, and I can honestly tell you that the correct answer is It depends. The important part is to actually do the maintenance and not get (too) far behind. There are a lot of sites that tend to get several releases (years) behind and then they end up calling me (or someone else) to get them back up to date. The important thing is that you do some sort of maintenance on some sort of schedule. The IBM REDBOOK pointed to previously in this thread is actually very good about giving hints on how you should perform the maintenance aspect of our Systems Programming jobs. Maintenance used to take a REALLY long time, and now it's actually fairly simple. There are a lot of factors to consider and the more complex your site, the higher the difficulty level in keeping relatively current. You really have to plan your system for the method you choose. There are those that feel that they can apply maint on a fixed schedule, and if that works for them then that is fine. There are others that believe that you should install a new release once a year (or two) and only put on maintenance that you absolutely need in order to fix a problem that you are experiencing. That's fine as well. What ever you decide, it will be great for you and your site. Personally, I like the method of installing a new release periodically and applying the current maintenance (as needed), and then doing all (or most) of the hyper fixes in between. It's a little more work, but it tends to work out good for me. I don't have a fixed schedule, but I try to keep the sites that I maintain at about the same level. There are quite a few. My reasons are because if I run into a problem at one site, I can be proactive and fix it for the others as well. It's terrible to admit, but this way I look really good because the ones that reported the problem are happy that I fixed it for them, and the others are totally thrilled that I was looking out for them. It's sort of a win-win thing, but I have to admit that it is a little more work on my end to keep everyone relatively equal. Also, by equal, I don't necessarily meant hat they are even at the same release, I maintain sites from 1.4 (unfortunately, and until recently I still had several OS/390 sites) ) to 1.12, but (where I can) they are all at the same level of maintenance. Most fixes are applied back to the older releases (as long as they are supported) so it's not as hard or as complex as it might seem. I try to keep them all as current as possible, but not all of them want (or need) to be on z/OS 1.12 so I try to be as flexible as possible, while keeping them all current (as much as possible) with maintenance. I urge you to find a way that works for you and try to be flexible. If you find that you need to change to meet the needs of your site, don't say no just because it doesn't meet your schedule of maintenance. Try to be a service to your site and try to be as accessible as possible. The old days of the wall between systems and the rest of the site are long gone (or should be). I miss them sometimes, but not very much. :) -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Quick question
Sorry in advance for the marketing plug, There is the older free AUTO product on the CBT and I think there is another scheduler that actually uses JES2 to do the work. Then there is SyzAUTO/z, which is not free but is both quite inexpensive and 100% supported. It allows job submission based on any timeofday, dayofweek/month/year, and has facilities to provide the highest condition codes via EMAIL and several other key features. The older free version has some issues with some times of day that are all resolved on SyzAUTO/z. Besides already being inexpensive, there are discounts for members of IBM-Main and SHARE on all of our system management and automation products. end of marketing plug. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Examples of TAM instruction
Thanks, I wanted to make sure that there wasn't a TAMCC like John was looking for. I didn't see it anywhere. Possibly there is a macro that he had used before. Thanks for your help. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Examples of TAM instruction
Does anyone have an assembler example of using the TAM (Test Addressing mode) instruction? I was asked how to use it, and I have never had to in the past so I've tried to find a writeup, and I can see that CC0=24bit, CC1=31bit and CC3=64bit, but can't find any examples anywhere. Any help that I can pass on would be appreciated. Thanks, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Automatic response fail on Console
Hi, We stopped supporting the free version of AUTO several years ago. There are quite a few problems with the old version that have been fixed and enhanced. The older version works under z/OS 1.10 for most (if not all) of the limited features it had, so you are probably just missing something critical. The new version is available at a reduced price to IBM-Main participants, but if you describe your problem with the old version I can try to help you through it. Brian Westerman Syzygy Incorporated www.SyzygyInc.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Paging increase when going from z/OS 1.9 to 1.11
Can you tell who/what is paging, (look in RMF). Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Adabas Pricing model
I tried the contact via the web site a few days ago and still have not heard back. I called (last Thursday) and was told that someone would get back with me asap. I guess asap takes longer than it used to. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Adabas Pricing model
So you guys actually had (or have) a capacity based agreement with SAG? Is it based on the same sub-capacity numbers that IBM uses or is there a special SAG way of doing this? Thanks, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Adabas Pricing model
Hi, I was asked today if Software AG had a sub capacity pricing model for Adabas and Natural. My first inclination was to tell them to call SAG, but they told me that they were unable to get any kind of response back on the question, so I tried myself, and I have not been able to get a response either, so I decided I would give you guys a shot. Is anyone aware of any sites that run Adabas/Natural under a sub-capacity license agreement? I think it's priced by MSU, so it makes sense that they would have one, but I can't tell either way. Any comments? Thanks for your help. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Anyone good with DFSORT? Does DFSORT have the ability to multiply offsets that are not known until that time?
The occurrence fields are 1 byte hex fields, and their offsets change based on what they are set to as I outlined before. The original reason we wanted to use DFSORT is the ability to change the data by passing it through a translate table (ALTSEQ). The reason we are doing this is to obfuscate the production data in these files to make test files (which we cannot control the use of), so we can't have names, addresses, past addresses and SSN's etc. in readable format. The DFSORT program allows us to use the ALTSEQ parm to scramble the letters and numbers for just the fields we are concerned about so that we know what they are changed to, but that it would be difficult for anyone to use if they were to get a copy of the test file. I think the same thing can be done with REXX and SAS, but I don't know how. I noticed that Elardaus in a previous response had said you can save into temporary fields, which is what I would like to do, (I think). Is anyone familiar enough with DFSORT to show me how that's done for something like this? Thanks again for all of the comments. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Anyone good with DFSORT? Does DFSORT have the ability to multiply offsets that are not known until that time?
Hi, I have a difficult request from a programmer and I'm not sure about the answer. They have a flat file which has fields that can occur multiple times within a record, and there are multiple of those fields in the same record. They want to be able to use DFSORT to overlay (some of) those fields with specific data, but the offsets change based on how many occurrences of the recurring fields there are in each record. We have no problem if we code the offsets manually, but there are files that have 15 (or more) of these fields and the number of manually coded WHEN IFHTEN= and overlay= cards gets into the several thousands when you have 10 to 20 occurrences of each field. Is there a way to do this with the sort parm logic? I know that the parms for DFSORT are pretty sophisticated, but the manual isn't written like I would hope it should be to make it easy to find something like this out. for instance if there is a file that is set up as follows: 2abcdef1ab3abc field1o (occurrences of field 1) starts in column1 and is a '2' so there are two of them in the field (each is 3 bytes long) so abc,def field2o (occurrences of field 2) starts in column 8 in this particular record and is a '1' so there is only one occurrence of the field2's and it happens to be 2 bytes long so it's ab' field30 (occurrences of field 3) starts in column 11 in this sample and is a '3' so there are 3 of them, each is 1 byte long so it's a,b,c the problem is that if there is only 1 field1 (instead of 2 in this sample), then field 2 (because field 1 is 3 bytes long), only occurs one time but field 2 now starts in column 5 instead of 8, and field3o starts in column 8 instead of 11 and field3 itself starts in column 9. i.e. 1abc1ab3abc there will always be at least 1 occurrence of each field, so the minimum is '1' in each occurrence field I know that we can multiply with the sort logic, but after we multiply the first occurrence field times the length of field1 (2x3=6), plus the offset past the first occurrence field 6+1=7, 7 is the last byte of field 1, so the total length+offset+1=8 which puts me on the next field (filed3o, occurrences of field 3) that I have to do something with. My problem is that I don't know that actual offset until execution time via the math, but I don't know of a way to hold that interim number so that I can use it in the next calculation (the one for field2o) and then the next one after that for field3o. Is there a way to do that, if so, what would an example look like? thanks for any help you can give, this one is driving me nuts, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: TSSO help please
I looked into the problem, and I think if you specify PROFILE VARSTORAGE(LOW) at the beginning of your REXX exec, you will be able to run without changing the convert program to flip in and out of 31 bit and not have to worry about it during the life of that particular exec. (make sure you change the program back). This appears to be the result of the change in z/OS 1.8 that added support for moving the storage obtained for parms above the line. The VARSTORAGE(LOW) will make it run like the pre-1.8 method for the life of the exec that issues the PROFILE VARSTORAGE(LOW) command only. It does not effect the rest of the system and won't effect the TSSO address space (except for your exec). It works on my test system that I have installed the current CBT version of TSSO on with your sample exec. To answer the other person's question, there are pieces of TSSO that have not worked correctly for quite some time, there are control block changes that we have patched the module for, but all we really have done is skip some functions to make the more important functions work. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: TSSO help please
I looked through my old notes and found that JCECVTDB is/was not authorized, it isn't meant to be, but it also isn't 31bit. Since you are getting an 0C4, is it possible that you have inadvertently assembled/linked things and made them 31bit? There are a lot of issues that will pop up over the next few releases of z/OS with TSSO, mostly because of the changes to the system to support System REXX, and it's possible also that you have run into some of them. I think that V1.13 will probably see the end of TSSO as t is now, but the original code is WELL over 30 years old and 4.3 is something on the order of 25+ years old. Once I saw the writing on the wall I decided that the best course was to re-write it completely and that's what I have been doing for the past year or so as time permits. I can't get mine to fail, but I have also modified things a great deal and no longer really have the old TSSO that you are probably using. I will download a copy of the old one and give your code a shot, but I wanted to make sure it wasn't something simple (like the wrong assembly/link parms). Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: TSSO help please
Hi, What version of TSSO are you using and what version of z/OS are you using it under? Did you assemble TSSO on the level of the system that you are using now? You can contact me offline if you want to discuss how to set things up correctly. Brian Westerman -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Ported tools for z/OS on ADCD
There is no shame in not knowing how to complete the setup, especially on an ADCD system. The first thing that you have to remember is that not all ADCD releases had the complete set of ported tools, there are many parts and they are not all necessarily there for you to use yet, but the good news is that you can order them and install them in a few minutes. The first step for you is to get the ported tools for z/OS page http://www-03.ibm.com/systems/z/os/zos/features/unix/port_tools.html and get the manuals at the bottom of the page. There are actually 7 parts (or more) tot he ported tools kit, and which one you are trying to use right now will govern which manual(s) that you need. If you are at ADCD V1.10 or above, then most likely you already have everything you need to get started. Just grab the manual for the part that you want to configure and jump in. None of them take very long to set up correctly, and there are many examples in the books and on the IBM web site, as well as some nice Redbooks, but if you need additional help, feel free to contact me offline, or here and I'll do what I can. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: fact or fiction?
Based on results from several conversions from 1.9 to 1.11 I have seen that the overhead has decreased between 5% and 7%. This is an average of all types of workloads, but the biggest gains are at sites with more OLTP going on. If you need more details, feel free to contact me offline. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: my father passed away
Please accept my condolences on your loss. Losing a parent is not easy and I hope that you will see past the current loss and realize that not only is he in a much better place, but that you will meet again. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Backup OFFLINE disks
I also have a offline backup and restore program that we are considering marketing in the near future for MUCH less than FDRInstant with FDR. It's currently in Beta, but there are no known issues in the past 40+ days. It's purpose is to be able to backup a flashcopy volume, or simply to be able to backup a copy of a volume which can't be mounted because another volume with the same name is mounted. We built it for a few of the Universities that we maintain that can't afford the high costs of some of the products that are available but still need the capability to do some specialty work. You are welcome to join the beta. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Change all RACF passwords at once
Hi, Is anyone aware of a way to change all user's passwords at the same time? I want to copy a racf database to a test LPAR, but I don't want everyone to be able to logon with their OLD password. I want them to get a preset password that I make for that new LPAR only. The RACF DB is not shared, it's just a copy. I know there is no generic for the ALTUSER, but I was hoping that someone knew of another way. Thanks, Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Change all RACF passwords at once
Ugh, I was hoping that there was a command to do it for me generically. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: How to route Master Cons after failure
V ,online V ,console Then it should take off right away. (assuming it's defined as a console in consolxx) Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS 1.11 upgrade - WLM couple datasets
It's a matter of what you feel is acceptable. Keeping a master catalog that may/will contain obsolete entries is not acceptable to me, but may be to some sites. I'm not trying to judge any sites on what they feel is correct. It's a clean way to migrate (new master catalogs) and in the case of the migrations I have done, cleaning things up is second nature. The allocation of a new master catalog is not done for any reason other than to keep things clean and simple. It allows me to document their new system completely and keeps the possibility of accidents to a minimum. Other people on the list may handle it otherwise, that's fine for them, my way takes no chances and I'm sure that they feel their way is safe for them, that's fine. In the end, (as I said originally) it's really a matter of what you are comfortable with. If you are comfortable with keeping your original master catalog, then keep it. I don't take those kinds of chances with someone else's site, and whether or not other people feel it's taking a chance is not relevant within the context of the migrations I have performed. I have never failed to complete a migration within the time limits that were set, and I have never had to fall back because of any mistakes, and the only fall backs that I have ever had to perform were done solely to test the ability to do it for a customer, not because it was a necessity. I believe in creating a plan and making that plan a foolproof as possible. Eliminating the possibility of problems down the line is just as important as other parts of the plan. Creating a new master catalog is high on that plan. The original posting was asking for a judgment on what was best. One can only say what they feel is best for them and why, because there are always alternatives. My way is not the only way, I never said it was, it's just the way that I have found to be the best for the client and less open to propagating any existing problems from one system to the next. As always, the choice is up to the individual who is performing the migration, we can offer our expertise and that's it. They can take advantage of it or not. I happen to have a lot of experience that most systems programmers don't get the chance to get, and at times it is very redundant, but in the case of catalogs, I have seen some catalog problems that make you wonder how they were able to continue to run at all. As such, I don't think it's wise to take any chances with a site's master catalog. It's too valuable, too easy to mess up and way too easy to fix to let problems exist in it. That said, it's still just my opinion. Obviously there are those that will continue to migrate to new master catalogs and those that will not. We can probably drop this thread as we have pretty much beaten it to death at this point. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: JES dataset close exit?
There are SSI's for them, I think open is 16 and close is 17. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/OS 1.11 upgrade - WLM couple datasets
If that's what works for you then by all means you should stick with it. I have performed literally hundreds of upgrades and I have never kept the old master catalog as the master for the new system. Mostly it has to do with properly setting up the master catalog in the first place. The only datasets in the master catalog should be those that get shipped with the new OS, the rest should be in usercats. Typically I have a MASTER catalog , and (sometimes) a SYSTEM usercatalog, the rest of the sites datasets belong in other user catalogs. There are a lot of datasets that are new to each release, and the extra time required to remove the old ones will probably never happen if I were to leave the old master in place. I can see where you would be able to keep things going for quite a while with system symbols for most of the important datasets, but eventually you are going to have a bunch of useless entries in your master catalog or things will move and you'll end up taking the chance that you will miss it. There seems to be a lot of chance for things to go wrong, and with all of the other issues involved in a migration, making it more complex, for me, is not a good thing. As I said though, if what you are currently doing works for you, then almost by definition it's correct, for you. Just because I feel it adds complexity, doesn't make me right, in the end, whatever works correctly is what is right. 1+1+1+1+1+1+1 = (5+2) = (4+3) = 14/2 = 7(1) = 7 On the other hand, if you are not using symbols and you are really reusing the same physical page datasets etc. then that's playing with fire. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: Dynamic Allocation 1.9 - 1.11?
IBM does not refuse to look into a difference when it's undocumented, no matter what your previous release was. Possibly you need to go back and present the issue again. I suppose that it's possible that you were dealing with someone who was inexperienced in how to handle the problem. If they can't point out that there was a documented change, then they will work on the problem. This is actually one that you could turn over to your marketing person, or business partner. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: End of JCL exit?
Not that I want to show my age, but I actually had to do that back on MVS/SP to provide the highest condition code mods, then IBM changed things a bit and I was able to develop the exit 8/16 combination that did it, then they finally added the code themselves. At the time I was spending a lot of time providing IEBUPDTE jobs to people who didn't want to have to figure out for themselves where to keep things. I don't miss that, and my boss at the time went from very proud to really P.O.ed with the amount of time I spent on the project. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
End of JCL exit?
I received an email today which at first seemed really simple to say yes/no to, but it started me to thinking. I was asked if it's possible to dynamically add a step to the end of a job via some system exit. At first I thought to tell them to use JES exit 4/54, because I've used it to add and change JCL cards many times, but never to the end of the JOB. I figured that there was probably a bit setting on the invocation that designated that it was the last card. Then a quick manual check seemed to show that while you can add and change JCL whenever you want, you have no real way of knowing when you are at the end of the job in question. If you have something to key off of, like the submitter was nice enough to put a /*EOF JECL card, you could probably do it, but the question was to be able to do this without making any user changes to the JCL. I thought about using the submit exit, but she was talking about jobs from any source. Our JOB scheduling package (SyzAUTO) can do it for the JOBs we schedule. But we control the copying of the JCL to the internal reader, so when we get to the end, we just pop our special step(s) to control the schedule or whatever else we want to do auto-magically (like sending the EOJ step condition codes via email, etc.). That doesn't apply in this case because the exit doesn't appear to know when the last JCL card is reached. I would imaging that if it's possible that (if you could figure out that you were at the last card of the JCL in exit 4/54) you could probably add as many cards as you wanted, although she only wants to add a single step execution card. I'm still stuck on how you figure out that your at the end. I just can't see that JES tells you that you are on the last card, although it does tell you when you are on the last line of the JOB card in the other input exits, it doesn't seem to know that it's at the end of the actual JCL. That almost doesn't make sense because I can't believe that JES doesn't know when it reaches the end, but I can't see it in the manuals. Does anyone have any ideas? I thought I might ask before I started to go through HASPRDR. Maybe I'm not even in the right area and JES isn't the spot to do it, but I don't think IEFUJV would work either. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: End of JCL exit?
Hi Gil, Yes it appears to be entered for a // line, but when I asked her, she said that they rarely use that as a delimiter. I can see in HASPRDR that he does know when he gets to the end of the JCL, but for some reason, doesn't call the exit again like he does for several others (like exit2/52). In the end this was just a question. If they wanted it for something specific that they had told me about then I would put more effort into it. I was hoping that someone might have run into something like this before and might want to share what they did, but you appear to be the only one to answer, and I thank you for that. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
Re: z/os x z/os.e differences
Thanks Tim, As you can see, most of these are not requirements to run on a z/10, although some of them add new functions (which you are not using now). The only ones that are really necessary are the ones that add support for HCD and IODF definitions of the 2098. If you already have that support (by the check of HCD that I mentioned earlier) then you can safely run on the z/10 as you are now. You shouldn't try to take advantage of features that you don't have support for (some hiperdispatch stuff), but you will run fine. There are some WLM stuff that pertains to kneecapped processors, but other than some odd RMF reporting issues, you won't even notice anything. The idea is that you are not going to stay at 1.8 for any long period of time, and you need to focus on moving to your replacement OS. This doesn't mean that you shouldn't bother to install these fixes, quite the contrary. You should always make every attempt to be as current as possible at your current OS level, because by doing that (assuming you already did), all of these would already be installed on your existing system. None of them are really that new. Brian -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
